Sony suing Bridgestone over Kevin Butler's Wii-related commercial?

Things are getting really weird with Bridgestone's recent Wii-related commercial. It all started when Kevin Butler was spotted in the company's "Game On" promotion featuring the Wii. It didn't take long for an updated TV spot to be released, this time featuring a new actor.

Lawyers are to blame for crap like this. Sony thinks they can trademark Lambert's likeness as "Kevin Butler", which is nonsense since it would prevent him from working for anyone else. Sony can't do that unless there is a non-compete clause in Lambert's contract.

Sony has also been doing huge cutbacks to remain profitable. Lets just say Kevin got a pay cut and he quit, while Sony's executives running the company into the floor are getting bonused all day long.

its more of he could work for bridgestone but Jerry Lambert is still under contract with sony in which he cant be promoting other systems other than sony. Bridgestone is the fault for not thinking that. BTW people dont get mad they not suing Jerry Lambert(Kevin Butler) they are suing Bridgestone.

"Lawyers are to blame for crap like this. Sony thinks they can trademark Lambert's likeness as "Kevin Butler", which is nonsense since it would prevent him from working for anyone else. Sony can't do that unless there is a non-compete clause in Lambert's contract."

I never saw the commercial. Did he use the Kevin Butler name and dress like him? If so I'm sure Sony would have a reason for suing. He'd have to at least not pretend to be the same character.

Wow, the amount of people talking about things that they don't understand here is staggering.

Guys....when an actor signs a commercial contract to represent a certain company, there is always a clause that states that said actor CANNOT EVER feature in any commercial work representing a competitor, it is a breach of contract.

Lebron is under Contract with Nike, hence can never appear in a commercial for Adidas, or Reebok, or Under Armour. Same thing for Messi as he is under contract with Adidas, therefore cannot feature in Nike commercials even though Barcelona, the club he plays for is sponsored by Nike. Any breach of those contract term is subject to legal action.

The purpose of commercials in the first place is build a certain perception, and actors/mascots are spokesperson for those companies. that's why they put these actors under a contract, meaning that you get paid specifically not to work for the competitor.

A company cannot afford to be publicly sponsoring you, and have you as a downloadable character in one their biggest franchises, while you're also pushing commercials for their direct competitor........I don't a single company that would allow that. And as much as I like Lambert, as an actor, he would be well aware of that, and as the president of marketing company, he would know that all too well.

Sony is going to have to cut ties with him, meaning that all their future plans to use him as Kevin Butler are now washed up, meaning an entire marketing strategy and investment has been foiled.......Cmon now, get real, What Lambert did was amateurish and unprofessional,and he breached his contract, period.

After reading through most of these comments I'm glad to see someone who actually understands what's going on. When this commercial came out I knew there would be a legal action coming and when Bridgestone suddenly edited out KB it was pretty much confirmed that this was going to happen.

I'm not sure if it's just people trolling because it's Sony or they really don't understand how the world works. I'd honestly be surprised if this weren't a shoe-in case for Sony and I suspect we'll hear about a settlement in a few months.

The only issue here is they are not suing the actor who might be in breach of contract. They are suing the companies that utilized him. And regardless of who is President... they can't sue the company for using him... they can only confront the actor if he is in breach.

kevin butler was never funny. it takes a certain level of desperation to think he did sony a favor with his marketing. it's just childish "humor" that idiots respond to. you can put that stupidity anywhere and there will be a moronic audience for it.

I don't know all of the names, but it could be that he is under a contract which may have prevented him from promoting any other console, videogame, or device. The only way Sony could sue Bridgestone is that they have a contract which supports the above statement.

Prince was under something similar, as he could not use the name given to him by his parents unless he was with Time/Warner; so it's not a stretch to think something like this exists out there.

There are a few reasons Sony could be suing and be within their right and not be bullying in the process.

Firstly is if he signed a non-compete clause. This would basically not allow him to work on anything for a certain period of time in advertising or not work on anything that was gaming related. It all depends on the contract he had signed with Sony.

2nd Sony could be suing because they believe Bridestone was leading people to believe he was still portraying the Kevin Butler character.

This has happened before mind you in a different business. During the Monday night wars of the late 90's the WWF sued the WCW when Razor Ramon(Scott Hall) went to WCW because when he went he played the same character and while they never said his name they clearly hinted at who he was and that he was portraying a character the WWF had Trademarked. As a matter of a fact one of the first things he said was "You know who I am but you don't know why I'm here" Implying he was their as the Razor Ramon character which was against his contract.

Something similar could be happening here with the Sony law suit but until more info comes out there is no reason to be throwing hate in every possible direction.

@Cupid_Viper_3: Even contracts aren't forever and actor can also decide to leave whenever contract is being negotiated. They can't force him to continue and contract is void after he leaves and he can work for their worst competitors. Of course, character of Kevin Butler is owned by Sony but not Lambert if he isn't on their paylist. Even Messi could change from Adidas to Nike if Adidas decides his contract is too expensive or Messi decides to change sides when contracts are negotiated. His contract doesn't last forever but could last for several years.

Kevin Butler aka Jerry Lambert, will unfortunately no longer be doing Sony/playstation commercials, sad really, I always enjoyed them. But I'm gonna call it now, MS will pick him up and do a commercial for "said game" for the 360/720. Cause we all know MS loves copying Sony, plus the amount of media frenzy it will gain will be huge advertisement.

this is just an example of a sony troll trying to paint an image of anyone who sees sony for the money grubbing corporation that they are. if you think this guy is trying to make a real point, you are an idiot.

he's trolling on behalf of sony fanboys everywhere. that's all it is. nobody is this stupid.

That's really stupid. He's an actor. What do you want him to do, wear a mask?

And furthermore. Kevin Butler was a CEO in a dress shirt and tie. In the Bridgestone commercial Lambert was a scientist/tester wearing lab clothes. That should be a big enough difference to tell the two characters apart. People just say he's the Kevin Butler guy because that was his most popular role.

He's an actor under contract to promote SONY! He's allowed to act as long as he isn't promoting Sony's competition. It's business. At least they aren't suing over something as stupid as rounded edges, which nobody seemed to complain about. But it's cool to hate on Sony. Doesn't seem to be cool to hate on Apple even if they are dumb!

You know what I find funny? I remember seeing COUNTLESS KB commercials during primetime tv and my sitcoms I watch when im not gaming or have too little time to start anything. However, I've only seem this bridgestone commercial ONCE outside of seeing it on N4G a while back. Why is this important? Because they're clearly marketing COMPLETELY different demographics (or I just got insanely lucky, but lets assume it's the demo). This means even if Lambert was acting or even looking like Butler, 90%+ of the people that saw the ad wouldn't have made the connection or even know who / what Kevin Butler is.

I disagree. This is clearly not marketing to a different demographic. The only gamers this ad is not aimed at are those that are too young to drive. I've seen the Bridgestone/Lambert commercials during NFL broadcasts. So let's tie this all together.

One of the most iconic things at outdoor sports events for decades was none other than the Goodyear blimp. Yes, another tire manufacturer.

Tire commercials, and general auto related commercials are plentiful during sports broadcasts. Saw some just last night during TBS's coverge of the ALDS and NLDS.

Bridgestone plays heavily to that with their 'made a football, hockey puck, etc. from our tire compound' whimsical commercials. If I'm not mistaken, they were first aired during the Superbowl.

Millions of sports games licensed from the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB, FIFA, etc. are sold to gamers every year, indicating many gamers are sports fans and many sports fans are gamers.

Why would Bridgestone and Nintendo run an ad that was aimed at drivers/gamers during a broadcast that didn't appeal to them? They wouldn't.

@Carl - Are you seriously trying to justify this? I understand if Jerry has some agreement in his contract that states that he can not appear in any other game related product as long as he is under contract with Sony...which if this is the case Sony should have just sent a warning later to Bridgestone asking them to pull the commercial or else which they did pull the commercial and replaced it very fast but for Sony to try and get money out of this makes them look just as bad as Apple for suing someone for using a shape.

Also they did not use KB in the commercial they used Jerry Lambert and he never spoke and was not even the main person in the commercial.

Sony messes up on this and they are also suing Lamberts advertising company which is sad because I really like him as a person.

It's so easy to see who the trolls are around here, every sony article the same people are there to troll it up a little bit. Then you see the same people on xbox articles saying they love this and love that.

Are you aware that lawsuits can be filed to show the seriousness/willingness to involve the legal system of the plaintiff? That far more are filed than actually go to trial? That not all settlements involve the defendant paying the plaintiff?

Do you know Jerry personally? I would think that would be required to like him as a person.

Expected as much... did sony do something to you as a child.. because your spite towards them is abnormal, even beyond fanboy terms

@Outside_ofthe_Box

No seriously, I think Frankfurt has a problem. Usually fanboys act like this to spite people on relevant articles... frankfurt does this in almost every comment he makes, iregardless of the content of the article

I honestly think

A) Sony did something to him as a child B) He works for microsoft based on his article posts and his comments C) He is a new breed of fanboy that we have not seen before... and it scares me

how is it embarassing? Their greatest TV Commercial Icon is promoting the competition. There is nothing emberassing to sue bridgestone for their stupid mistake. Its called business dude MS, Apple and even Nintendo do it all the time

Do you people actually think that Jerry Lambert gives a crap about Sony?
He's an actor, ffs.
He's more concerned about putting food on the table and taking care of his wife and kids.
I doubt this guy knew anything about the PS3/Move before he had to learn about them for the TV ads.

It's been stated a dozen times and not sure why I'm stating it, but Lambert had an endorsement deal with Sony and is now promoting a direct competitor. If it was a taco bell commercial Sony wouldn't sue. If it was a tire commercial talking about traction in rainy weather Sony wouldn't care, but it is what it is.